Should Hasbro Sell D&D?

125 posts / 0 new
Last post
As a military brat and soldier, I have been playing this game since 1980 with people all over the world.

Is it time for Hasbro to hang the weapons over the fireplace?

Please roll to see if I'm bluffing or not.
Should a game company sell the rights to the #1 game in the rpg market?  No.  They should probably market it better, not hold it to the same expectations as CCGs, and generally learn how to handle both the brand and the product type in a way that is both respectful and lucrative.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Takes a deep breath "...." na screw it, you figure it out. I gotta P.F. game to "G.M."Sealed
Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?
Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



I have my suspicions...

The Knights of W.T.F. may as well be ghosts, but the message still stays;

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
  • PRAISE THE SUN!
Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



I have my suspicions...


Maybe then we might finally get an update to D20 Modern/Future.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



I have my suspicions...


Maybe then we might finally get an update to D20 Modern/Future.



Or a new alternity, lol

The Knights of W.T.F. may as well be ghosts, but the message still stays;

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
  • PRAISE THE SUN!
"Should Hasbro Sell" is based on precisely this:

Tally up all the costs of producing D&D for Hasbro.  Then, tally the profits one could expect from that investment, including the future profit from reviving D&D after a mothball period.  Get your net profit out of this.

Is someone offering to buy for more than the number you got?  If so, sell: you'll make more right now than you could hope to make off the property.  Otherwise you hold it.

Hasbro's habits lean towards holding, estimating the profit from a later generation as unknown and too risky to sell away.  I think that's kind of dangerous as an approach to D&D, since the RPG market relies a LOT on continuity, and D&D's stock would more likely erode rather than rise after a period of non-production, but I don't even have a degree in business, so it's far more likely they know something I don't than the other way around.

But the principle is simple: It becomes time to sell when there's a good enough market.

"Enjoy your screams, Sarpadia - they will soon be muffled beneath snow and ice."
On Worldbuilding - On Crafting Aliens - Pillars of Art and Flavor - Simulationism, Narritivism, and Gamism - Shub-Niggurath in D&D
THE COALITION WAR GAME -Phyrexian Chief Praetor
Round 1: (4-1-2, 1 kill)
Round 2: (16-8-2, 4 kills)
Round 3: (18-9-2, 1 kill)
Round 4: (22-10-0, 2 kills)
Round 5: (56-16-3, 9 kills)
Round 6: (8-7-1)

Last Edited by Ralph on blank, 1920

"Should Hasbro Sell" is based on precisely this:

Tally up all the costs of producing D&D for Hasbro.  Then, tally the profits one could expect from that investment, including the future profit from reviving D&D after a mothball period.  Get your net profit out of this.

Is someone offering to buy for more than the number you got?  If so, sell: you'll make more right now than you could hope to make off the property.  Otherwise you hold it.

Hasbro's habits lean towards holding, estimating the profit from a later generation as unknown and too risky to sell away.  I think that's kind of dangerous as an approach to D&D, since the RPG market relies a LOT on continuity, and D&D's stock would more likely erode rather than rise after a period of non-production, but I don't even have a degree in business, so it's far more likely they know something I don't than the other way around.

But the principle is simple: It becomes time to sell when there's a good enough market.


I think you also forgot to include the option of leasing the rights to others in your analysis.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



Brian Goldner and Lisa Stevens might want to ask that question.
I have been given the impression that the D&D fictional novels and video games are more profitable than the tabletop RPG.  They could be sustained for decades without a specific printed ruleset.
Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



Brian Goldner and Lisa Stevens might want to ask that question.

Why would Paizo buy D&D when they have Pathfinder?  They've already got what they needed from the IP.

Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



Brian Goldner and Lisa Stevens might want to ask that question.


Maybe you could have your "personal firends" pass it on to them.

. . . I may be tempted to start talking to Wizard's executive staff, who are personal friends of mine, again in order to shake things up.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Is it time for Hasbro to hang the weapons over the fireplace?

I do not believe that idiom means what you think it means (and if it did, it still would not seem apropos). That said:

The matter has been discussed in plenty of other threads. Basically: it's moot because Hasbro simply doesn't sell of their lines. They'll shelve before they sell. That said:

I like a large corporation owning D&D. It has allowed me to do some incredible things as a DM.  

You never know. Paizo might be interested in doing 5E for Hasbro. I don't see how this concerns you, GundamPilot. It's not like you work for Wizards.
Is it time for Hasbro to hang the weapons over the fireplace?

I do not believe that idiom means what you think it means (and if it did, it still would not seem apropos).

Before Hitchcock or Chekov, hanging a sword above the mantelpiece was a symbol of retirement.  It was where you placed the symbolic sword of your family, and one would give it to their firstborn child upon making them the new head of the family.
I don't see how this concerns you, GundamPilot. It's not like you work for Wizards.

Neither do many of the other people on these forums.  If you only wanted the topic of this thread to be discussed by WotC employees, then you either should have said so or you should have found a better place for the discussion.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I guess what I'm saying is that I would like every forum member to comment except you.
Paizo can't afford it so Lisa and Co are right out. It leaves companies like Disney or software companies like EA or Bioware who probably wouldn't be interested.

 To recap form 2004 WoTC has lost.

1. Number 1 posiiton as RPG leader.
2. Dragon and Dungeon magazine being replaced by Kobold Quarterly and Pathfinder Adventure PAths
3. A successful minis line, since picked up by Paizo 
4. Ex WoTC staffers after being fired making their own RPGs (PF, 13th Age)
5. A virtual collapse in D&D related video games and the rise of a PF one in development.

 Put simply it wouln't really bother me if they did sell D&D. I just do not care either way. 
Should a game company sell the rights to the #1 game in the rpg market?  No.  They should probably market it better, not hold it to the same expectations as CCGs, and generally learn how to handle both the brand and the product type in a way that is both respectful and lucrative.



I dont think ren1999 was asking if a game company should sell the rights to the #1 game in the rpg market.  He was asking if Hasbro should sell the rights to DnD.

And the answer is yes, they should.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
As long as the editions of D&D and any products they sell, adventures, tiles, minis, books, etc. remain profitable, there's no reason to not produce them.  As long as licensing the product to others remains a viable option, there really is no reason for Hasbro to sell.  I don't see them selling unless they get a ridiculously good offer.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Should a game company sell the rights to the #1 game in the rpg market?  No.  They should probably market it better, not hold it to the same expectations as CCGs, and generally learn how to handle both the brand and the product type in a way that is both respectful and lucrative.



I dont think ren1999 was asking if a game company should sell the rights to the #1 game in the rpg market.  He was asking if Hasbro should sell the rights to DnD.

And the answer is yes, they should.


D&D is the #1 game in the RPG market as far as brand recognition goes.  And, given the volume of posters who play pathfinder but still consider themselves to be D&D players, I'd venture that the brand carries more weight than sales indicate.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Is it time for Hasbro to hang the weapons over the fireplace?

I do not believe that idiom means what you think it means (and if it did, it still would not seem apropos).

Before Hitchcock or Chekov, hanging a sword above the mantelpiece was a symbol of retirement.

Exactly. But it is not an actual idiom (i.e. I was in the military for 20 years and I never heard someone actually use the phrase to refer to retirement, even though most soldiers are aware of the tradition). But even if it was: the OP was referring to selling the property rather than retiring it (thus 'it still would not seem apropos').

Why would Hasbro sell any of their product lines? That's pretty much saying they'd rather have someone else make money than them. 
They'll never sell. Ever. Period.
If D&D isn't doing well enough for them they'll cancel the line. If they think someone else can do it better and getting that staff would be too expensive, they'll licence the property and collect a share of the profits.  
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: 
What Would Wrecan Say?

5 Minute Workday

My Webcomic
Updated Tue & Thur

 

D&D is the #1 game in the RPG market as far as brand recognition goes.  And, given the volume of posters who play pathfinder but still consider themselves to be D&D players, I'd venture that the brand carries more weight than sales indicate.



That used to be true.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
D&D is the #1 game in the RPG market as far as brand recognition goes.  And, given the volume of posters who play pathfinder but still consider themselves to be D&D players, I'd venture that the brand carries more weight than sales indicate.



That used to be true.


Not sure which part you mean.  If you're talking about the first part, it is true.  If I talk to someone about roleplaying games and they don't know what I'm talking about, saying Pathfinder, or GURPS, or anything other than D&D isn't going to make them understand.  If I say D&D though, they generally get it, although they may have misguided opinions or misunderstand the play experience due to lack of experience with it.
There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Why would Hasbro sell any of their product lines? That's pretty much saying they'd rather have someone else make money than them. 
They'll never sell. Ever. Period.
If D&D isn't doing well enough for them they'll cancel the line. If they think someone else can do it better and getting that staff would be too expensive, they'll licence the property and collect a share of the profits.  



This. Selling would have to be lucrative enough to account for future profits. That, in addition to the fact D&D, based on how much it sold for in the past, is damn near worth $100 million, there isn't a game company out there short of Activision Blizzard capable of buying D&D. That would still require D&D to be put up for sale, which it won't.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
I guess what I'm saying is that I would like every forum member to comment except you.

I agree with Mechapilot and disagree with you.

D&D is the #1 game in the RPG market as far as brand recognition goes.  And, given the volume of posters who play pathfinder but still consider themselves to be D&D players, I'd venture that the brand carries more weight than sales indicate.



That used to be true.


Yeah, World of Warcraft, and its humongous profits definitely dominate the RPG market now. WoW has become a household name, but D&D still has control over the table top market in terms of brand name recognition. If you are talking about pathfinder, you are delusional. The only thing the average person thinks of when they hear Pathfinder is the Nissan Pathfinder. D&D is a household name.
CORE MORE, NOT CORE BORE!
"Should Hasbro sell D&D?"

Answer: No.

Why?

Answer: Because D&D is THE brand recognition outside the fandom and because it's a LOT more than just one specific edition. Anyone who wants to start playing an RPG has a good chance of starting with D&D instead of Pathfinder or Warhammer or Call of Cthulhu. Also, D&D has spawned many interesting settings (ie. the Forgotten Realms) that venture into other genres like Video Games, Novels, Miniatures Lines, and even movie-replica weapons that Hasbro sees some of this as revenue as well. Further, they always have the right to pull it for a time until the market seems to be more accepting to their brand. So if, for some reason, D&D:Next fails to meet their intended goals and they shelve it there's a possibiliy of people willing to play it again in say 10 years or so down the line after some dust has cleared (I mean, look at My Little Pony?!?!)

Anyways, I think Hasbro would lose far more money in the long run by selling D&D than what's already transpired. Besides, I don't think any other gaming company would do it justice in the first place.        
It would take a small company with a much more focused design goal to create a better 5E, but no company that small could possibly afford the license.
The metagame is not the game.

I don't really care who owns D&D, as long as they are making a game I like. I like what I have seen from DDN so far. I liked 4e, though it was not one of my favorite RPGs by any stretch of the imagination--it was for a time, but over time I found too many problems with it. I hated 3e. I hate Pathfinder. But I loved d20 Modern and Star Wars Saga (which were similar to 3e). I also loved 2e back in its day. 

 So, do I think WotC should sell off the D&D brand? No. 


I don't really care who owns D&D, as long as they are making a game I like. I like what I have seen from DDN so far. I liked 4e, though it was not one of my favorite RPGs by any stretch of the imagination--it was for a time, but over time I found too many problems with it. I hated 3e. I hate Pathfinder. But I loved d20 Modern and Star Wars Saga (which were similar to 3e). I also loved 2e back in its day. 

 So, do I think WotC should sell off the D&D brand? No. 




 You like d20 with the spellcasters stripped out;) So do I lol.

 These days due to the OGL though all D&D has fgoing for it is the name recognition, the TSR settings and a handful of D&D monsters- beholders. yuan ti, gith, illitihids. How much that name is worth IDK but scuttle butt has it they turned down $100 million for it.
just how much is it costing to develop this darn thing?    It can't be as expensive as a video game, can it?

My guess is they'll sell it when the money they can make from the sale will allow them to invest in something more profitable.   Is the future bright for dnd?   I guess we will find out.
just how much is it costing to develop this darn thing?    It can't be as expensive as a video game, can it?

My guess is they'll sell it when the money they can make from the sale will allow them to invest in something more profitable.   Is the future bright for dnd?   I guess we will find out.



With the inflation of video games (For $60, I better get a complete game!), I sometimes question...

Also, try as you may to question the future, it is still more grey than the present.

The Knights of W.T.F. may as well be ghosts, but the message still stays;

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
  • PRAISE THE SUN!
Who would they sell it to? Who do you think would do a markedly better job of running it?



I have my suspicions...

I cannot stop laughing

I would like nothing more than to see D&D shoved into some indie closet and recapture some of its "small fish" allure again, but it's gone, really.


I don't really see what could be gained from another large company buying it either.

Does anyone remember RIFTS?  The same people still own that game.  They recently required the use of Kickstart to fund a new setting book.  The book was a disappointment (for me anyway) and their game has completely faded from the RPG conversation.  I say this to point out that a small company of dedicated enthusiasts may not always be enough to breath life into a failing RPG franchise.

I don't really care who owns D&D, as long as they are making a game I like. I like what I have seen from DDN so far. I liked 4e, though it was not one of my favorite RPGs by any stretch of the imagination--it was for a time, but over time I found too many problems with it. I hated 3e. I hate Pathfinder. But I loved d20 Modern and Star Wars Saga (which were similar to 3e). I also loved 2e back in its day. 

 So, do I think WotC should sell off the D&D brand? No. 




 You like d20 with the spellcasters stripped out;) So do I lol.

 These days due to the OGL though all D&D has fgoing for it is the name recognition, the TSR settings and a handful of D&D monsters- beholders. yuan ti, gith, illitihids. How much that name is worth IDK but scuttle butt has it they turned down $100 million for it.



Your mileage may vary, but I like what I have been seeing for DDN quite a bit. Between bounded accuracy, skill dice, and the direction the game seems to be taking, it might very well end up being my favorite edition to date. So, I think we will have to agree to disagree about it only having name recognition going for it...

Who would buy it, Disney, Blizzard, Warner, White Wolf?

What if Disney buy Hasbro in the next years?

 

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 


I don't really care who owns D&D, as long as they are making a game I like. I like what I have seen from DDN so far. I liked 4e, though it was not one of my favorite RPGs by any stretch of the imagination--it was for a time, but over time I found too many problems with it. I hated 3e. I hate Pathfinder. But I loved d20 Modern and Star Wars Saga (which were similar to 3e). I also loved 2e back in its day. 

 So, do I think WotC should sell off the D&D brand? No. 




 You like d20 with the spellcasters stripped out;) So do I lol.

 These days due to the OGL though all D&D has fgoing for it is the name recognition, the TSR settings and a handful of D&D monsters- beholders. yuan ti, gith, illitihids. How much that name is worth IDK but scuttle butt has it they turned down $100 million for it.



Your mileage may vary, but I like what I have been seeing for DDN quite a bit. Between bounded accuracy, skill dice, and the direction the game seems to be taking, it might very well end up being my favorite edition to date. So, I think we will have to agree to disagree about it only having name recognition going for it...




 Have you played the current packet or only read it;) It loos good but it has issues to put it mildly.